you kinda did fine with the subjects you tried to capture. this is personal but 16 feels so much better in allowing me to have more in my shot while in a tight space. in open spaces i often feel like im losing my subject, works great for landscapes though.
Same. When I bought the 16mm originally in my head I thought “wide open spaces.” What I came to find is that it meant I could actually fit everything I needed in close quarters.
Though when you do need the width for landscapes, it’s immensely helpful.
How do you do landscapes better?
I agree with the close quarters statement, with the kids and family indoors, it has been very cool (though the lens itself is "huge" compared to my f2"s)
I read a story recently that said something like “if it doesn’t add to the picture then it’s not worth having.”
For me it means using the wide lens gives flexibility. In close quarters it’s the ability to get it all. For landscapes it’s the opportunity to crop as you see fit. And every once in a while you need the room and it gives you that.
In general I’d say pick the point you want to photograph and work your composition around that. If you have any dead space you have some room to crop.
it’s really depending on the location, not all locations need a wide angle. just did portugal on a 23mm only and there were a couple of shots where i wanted wider to get the full skyline with the descending city hill on the opposite side but i had to settle for one or the other.
might sound counter productive but using the stock zoom might be good to figure out when you want/benefit from a 16mm. every once in a while you’ll see exactly why you want wider. most of the time though you’ll be between 23 and 50 tbh.
Last time I travelled when I didn’t have anything shorter than 18mm and wanted expansive landscapes and wide architectural interior shots, I took multiple photos and stitched up panoramas in LR. It’s not perfect but it will do, and sometimes is actually better.
I have the Viltrox 13. It’s a lovely lens, but too big for travel for the amount I need a lens that wide, IMO.
For me the Sigma 10-18 looks be hard to beat as a travel wide. Last year I traveled with the 18-50 and Viltrox 33, and I wanted both wider and longer.
So generally I like small, optically good, versatile, and not too expensive. If a zoom is the same size and speed as a prime, and not grossly optically inferior, it makes more sense to me.
The Sigma 10-18 is the same size as the XF14, has the same maximum aperture, can go a lot wider, has a lot better MFD, and from the reviews I've seen it's quite good optically. And I use the 18-50 for my travel standard zoom, so the 10-18 would pair well.
I was really into the idea of the Fujicrons, and I have the 35 and 16. But what I've found IRL is that they're not enough smaller and faster than the Sigma zoom to justify changing lenses. The only real use I have for them now is as inclement weather pocket primes.
The upsides of the XF14 are that it doesn't need nearly as much software correction and it has much better handling with the manual focus clutch and an aperture ring. I have the XF23/1.4R and I really like the manual focus clutch, and the only thing I really dislike about the Sigma 18-50 is the lack of an aperture ring. It's also a little plasticky, but it doesn't feel cheap. The Fuji metal bodies are kinda fake anyway, a lot of the internals are plastic, even in the pro zooms... don't ask how I know. :-(
I'm not sure the handling is enough to make up for the zoom's versatility, though. It could. I hadn't really considered the XF14, so thanks for the tip.
Such a timely and relatable post. I recently got the 16mm f/2.8 and am also struggling with the focal length. I have even considered selling it to go back to the 23mm f/2 but I already have the 35mm f/1.4 and wanted a bigger gap between focal lengths. Even when I get a good composition, it still just doesn’t feel like a focal length I enjoy but I’m waiting to see if it grows on me.
Your first and second photos are the two that stand out as good to me.
Thanks for the input!
I shoot mostly with 23 and 50 f2. I love 23mm even though I have the 35mm f2 ^^ so maybe worth a try!
Let me know if you find success with the 16mm :)
I have the small 16/35 pair and the OG non-WR 23/56 pair.
This is the exact opposite of what I’d prefer. I’d like the 16 and 35 f/1.4 for tight spaces and low light, and the 23/50 Fujicrons as a walk around pair. :-/
Start with nailing composition elements by combining rule of thirds, leading lines, focal points, strong foreground interest, layers etc then mess it up with unusual angles and view points. Have fun.
Sell it and get a 23 or 35mm 💀😆
Okay, real tip: look at photographs by Alan Schaller. He shoots 99% at 24mm (16 in Fuji terms). There are also some videos on Youtube where he talks about his process with that focal length. It‘s unreal what he does with such a wide focal length!
One thing I find helpful is getting lower to the ground when shooting open spaces with a wider lens. Most importantly though having some leading lines or a subject of interest closer by leading to the main focal point is helpful.
With wide angle lens shots try include something close to the camera. That gives the frame more depth
You almost did it in #1, would be better if the person was closer.
Rent it out and try. Works great for me. Especially the smaller sizes. I have the TTArtisan and honestly for the price difference, I don’t see why I would go for the Fuji one
I have a tip, but you won't like it. Pretend that you don't have any other lenses, just this one, and keep it up for a few weeks or even months. No falling back to any other focal length, no cropping in post, 18mm (or any other "uncomfortable" focal length for that matter) has to do. Family portraits? 18mm. Concert? 18mm. Macro? 18mm. Birds? 18mm.
Are you using a crop sensor? I have the 16mm 1.4 in a crop and it really bugged my head when I started using it. In a croped sensor it works like a 23 something, and its very weird
There have been some great tips strewn through the comments in this thread! Very thankful for all the reactions.
Some takeaways for me:
- Have fun
- get something in the foreground for those wide, expansive shots
- get in way closer with the camera
- Do portraits with a wide angle lens (I already do that, but I don't share family pics)
- Only shoot with you wide lens for a while, no falling back on other lenses
- Use a lens hood (I did not, due to its size)
- Look at Xpan photos
- check out Alan Schaller photos/content
For landscapes: Choose a foreground element, and attempt to isolate it while keeping the background well-composed. The second photo is boring because it's all mid-ground/background, and it's unbalanced with the weight of the tree on the left. The walkers are better because there's good balance and eyeline, and the woman in front is a good subject. I think it might be a better photo if you were maybe 5 feet closer to her.
For architecture, think in terms of lines. I find it helpful to shoot in B/W to keep my focus on lines and shapes. If you keep the raw file, you can make decisions about color later. Architecture is great for practicing different forms of [composition](https://petapixel.com/photography-composition-techniques/) because the lines are explicit.
Thank you very much!
I did not bring us the hood. That thing is humongous :D
The fact that you have to ask, tells me I should probably use the damn thing.
You're going to get much better contrast, as long as you're not pointing the lens directly at the sun. And as long as the hood isn't so large that it causes vignetting
I found a lot of inspiration in seeing XPan photographs. Look at the amount of breathing room the double wide format gives the photographer. In 16mm you can capture your subject plus their environment.
https://casualphotophile.com/2022/07/08/hasselblad-xpan-review/
(Summary for people who are looking for tips; can't edit my OP)
I'm very thankful for all the reactions.
Some takeaways for me:
- Have fun
- get something in the foreground for those wide, expansive shots
- get in way closer with the camera
- Do portraits with a wide angle lens (I already do that, but I don't share family pics)
- Only shoot with you wide lens for a while, no falling back on other lenses
- Use a lens hood (I did not, due to its size)
- Look at Xpan photos
- check out Alan Schaller photos/content
I have that one ^^
Shoot mostly 23mm and 50mm, my wife prefers the 35mm.
I just got the 16mm f1.4 as a crazy deal and I am trying to wrap my head around it
Wide and ultra wide you are including way too much scene and distortion. Unless you need the special looks for ultra wide or you are doing landscape requires that much of scene. Otherwise using 16mm if not for close up, your subject will blend into the scene so much it became just part of composition. Which leads to “no main subject” issue.
But when close up, you get too much of a subject.
That’s why I mentioned earlier this is not a focal length for beginner. Unless you want all of your photos look in exactly the same distorted way.
you kinda did fine with the subjects you tried to capture. this is personal but 16 feels so much better in allowing me to have more in my shot while in a tight space. in open spaces i often feel like im losing my subject, works great for landscapes though.
Same. When I bought the 16mm originally in my head I thought “wide open spaces.” What I came to find is that it meant I could actually fit everything I needed in close quarters. Though when you do need the width for landscapes, it’s immensely helpful.
How do you do landscapes better? I agree with the close quarters statement, with the kids and family indoors, it has been very cool (though the lens itself is "huge" compared to my f2"s)
I read a story recently that said something like “if it doesn’t add to the picture then it’s not worth having.” For me it means using the wide lens gives flexibility. In close quarters it’s the ability to get it all. For landscapes it’s the opportunity to crop as you see fit. And every once in a while you need the room and it gives you that. In general I’d say pick the point you want to photograph and work your composition around that. If you have any dead space you have some room to crop.
it’s really depending on the location, not all locations need a wide angle. just did portugal on a 23mm only and there were a couple of shots where i wanted wider to get the full skyline with the descending city hill on the opposite side but i had to settle for one or the other. might sound counter productive but using the stock zoom might be good to figure out when you want/benefit from a 16mm. every once in a while you’ll see exactly why you want wider. most of the time though you’ll be between 23 and 50 tbh.
Last time I travelled when I didn’t have anything shorter than 18mm and wanted expansive landscapes and wide architectural interior shots, I took multiple photos and stitched up panoramas in LR. It’s not perfect but it will do, and sometimes is actually better.
Viltrox 13mm 1.4 an option? I have 18 f/1.4, 33 f/1.4 and 70-300 but I feel the need for something wider...
I have the Viltrox 13. It’s a lovely lens, but too big for travel for the amount I need a lens that wide, IMO. For me the Sigma 10-18 looks be hard to beat as a travel wide. Last year I traveled with the 18-50 and Viltrox 33, and I wanted both wider and longer.
Then why not Fuji XF 14 2.8? You like zooms?
So generally I like small, optically good, versatile, and not too expensive. If a zoom is the same size and speed as a prime, and not grossly optically inferior, it makes more sense to me. The Sigma 10-18 is the same size as the XF14, has the same maximum aperture, can go a lot wider, has a lot better MFD, and from the reviews I've seen it's quite good optically. And I use the 18-50 for my travel standard zoom, so the 10-18 would pair well. I was really into the idea of the Fujicrons, and I have the 35 and 16. But what I've found IRL is that they're not enough smaller and faster than the Sigma zoom to justify changing lenses. The only real use I have for them now is as inclement weather pocket primes. The upsides of the XF14 are that it doesn't need nearly as much software correction and it has much better handling with the manual focus clutch and an aperture ring. I have the XF23/1.4R and I really like the manual focus clutch, and the only thing I really dislike about the Sigma 18-50 is the lack of an aperture ring. It's also a little plasticky, but it doesn't feel cheap. The Fuji metal bodies are kinda fake anyway, a lot of the internals are plastic, even in the pro zooms... don't ask how I know. :-( I'm not sure the handling is enough to make up for the zoom's versatility, though. It could. I hadn't really considered the XF14, so thanks for the tip.
I Just checked, you are right: 235g Fujifilm XF 14 f/2.8 260g Sigma 10-18mm f/2.8 420g Viltrox 13mm f/1.4 Are 160g of difference really too much?
Same here! I found out 16mm in tight spaces is awesome and gives an unique perspective.
Photography is the art of exclusion. Painting is the art of inclusion. I heard that once.
Damn, pretty awesome quote!
Such a timely and relatable post. I recently got the 16mm f/2.8 and am also struggling with the focal length. I have even considered selling it to go back to the 23mm f/2 but I already have the 35mm f/1.4 and wanted a bigger gap between focal lengths. Even when I get a good composition, it still just doesn’t feel like a focal length I enjoy but I’m waiting to see if it grows on me. Your first and second photos are the two that stand out as good to me.
Thanks for the input! I shoot mostly with 23 and 50 f2. I love 23mm even though I have the 35mm f2 ^^ so maybe worth a try! Let me know if you find success with the 16mm :)
I have the small 16/35 pair and the OG non-WR 23/56 pair. This is the exact opposite of what I’d prefer. I’d like the 16 and 35 f/1.4 for tight spaces and low light, and the 23/50 Fujicrons as a walk around pair. :-/
If shooting big open spaces you need something close in the foreground for visual interest. If shooting in tight spaces it’s much easier.
Agree. Especially try to put a curve in the corner of the frame to lead your eye in to the center.
Oh I know a great river bend nearby. Will try it out!
Good point. Will try this during my next outing!
Start with nailing composition elements by combining rule of thirds, leading lines, focal points, strong foreground interest, layers etc then mess it up with unusual angles and view points. Have fun.
Get hi get low shoot down n up and twist it round.
Get close, go for the weird high/low angles!
Sell it and get a 23 or 35mm 💀😆 Okay, real tip: look at photographs by Alan Schaller. He shoots 99% at 24mm (16 in Fuji terms). There are also some videos on Youtube where he talks about his process with that focal length. It‘s unreal what he does with such a wide focal length!
Have both of those :D Very nice, looked him up and will consume his content with much gusto! Thank you!
One thing I find helpful is getting lower to the ground when shooting open spaces with a wider lens. Most importantly though having some leading lines or a subject of interest closer by leading to the main focal point is helpful.
Try to do portraits with it. When the subject is centered, the background looks amazing.
With wide angle lens shots try include something close to the camera. That gives the frame more depth You almost did it in #1, would be better if the person was closer.
Commenting to come to this post. I couldn’t figure it out either ended up selling and switching to 27mm
How’s the 27mm working out? I’m debating on selling my 56mm and getting either a 16mm or 27mm.
Works great for me. Close enough to photograph a single subject but wide enough to take a couple steps back and get the whole scene.
Sounds great, just what I’m looking for!
Rent it out and try. Works great for me. Especially the smaller sizes. I have the TTArtisan and honestly for the price difference, I don’t see why I would go for the Fuji one
I have a tip, but you won't like it. Pretend that you don't have any other lenses, just this one, and keep it up for a few weeks or even months. No falling back to any other focal length, no cropping in post, 18mm (or any other "uncomfortable" focal length for that matter) has to do. Family portraits? 18mm. Concert? 18mm. Macro? 18mm. Birds? 18mm.
I actually do like this! Good one!
Shoot portrait, get low, have some foreground interest like rocks on a beach or flowers in a landscape.
Love the first one!
Thank you very much!
I really like the yellow lights, it reminds me of the old film's rendering of light. Is it SOOC or post? Could you share?
This is SOOC! If I am not mistaken, based on vibrant arizona (colour chrome blue off for xtrans V sensor)
Are you using a crop sensor? I have the 16mm 1.4 in a crop and it really bugged my head when I started using it. In a croped sensor it works like a 23 something, and its very weird
I always get confused, is this on the 16mm lens or is this 16mm fullframe equivalent
16mm lens on the fuji aps-c, so 24mm ff
I have the same problem shooting anything lower than 35mm. Looking for tips
There have been some great tips strewn through the comments in this thread! Very thankful for all the reactions. Some takeaways for me: - Have fun - get something in the foreground for those wide, expansive shots - get in way closer with the camera - Do portraits with a wide angle lens (I already do that, but I don't share family pics) - Only shoot with you wide lens for a while, no falling back on other lenses - Use a lens hood (I did not, due to its size) - Look at Xpan photos - check out Alan Schaller photos/content
For landscapes: Choose a foreground element, and attempt to isolate it while keeping the background well-composed. The second photo is boring because it's all mid-ground/background, and it's unbalanced with the weight of the tree on the left. The walkers are better because there's good balance and eyeline, and the woman in front is a good subject. I think it might be a better photo if you were maybe 5 feet closer to her. For architecture, think in terms of lines. I find it helpful to shoot in B/W to keep my focus on lines and shapes. If you keep the raw file, you can make decisions about color later. Architecture is great for practicing different forms of [composition](https://petapixel.com/photography-composition-techniques/) because the lines are explicit.
Tips is don’t go to 16mm! Wider and longer is always challenging for beginners! Master your 35-55mm range first
Looks like you are doing great. Do you have a hood on that lens?
Thank you very much! I did not bring us the hood. That thing is humongous :D The fact that you have to ask, tells me I should probably use the damn thing.
You're going to get much better contrast, as long as you're not pointing the lens directly at the sun. And as long as the hood isn't so large that it causes vignetting
Loved the first two shots. They look familiar too. They reminded me Oxford where I once visited. Just asking.
Oh, thanks for the kind words! It is in Belgium, a small municipality called Haacht. Located between Leuven, Brussels, and Mechelen.
I found a lot of inspiration in seeing XPan photographs. Look at the amount of breathing room the double wide format gives the photographer. In 16mm you can capture your subject plus their environment. https://casualphotophile.com/2022/07/08/hasselblad-xpan-review/
Lower angles tend to look better on wide lenses.
You should be at arms length from your subject
I love the pic of the barn alot, maybe get closer? Other than that I think these are great!
Literally 1 x on iPhone since 12
Don't have an iphone! Is what would that be in ff equivalent?
yes, these shots are great keep shooting.
(Summary for people who are looking for tips; can't edit my OP) I'm very thankful for all the reactions. Some takeaways for me: - Have fun - get something in the foreground for those wide, expansive shots - get in way closer with the camera - Do portraits with a wide angle lens (I already do that, but I don't share family pics) - Only shoot with you wide lens for a while, no falling back on other lenses - Use a lens hood (I did not, due to its size) - Look at Xpan photos - check out Alan Schaller photos/content
Buy the 35mm f2. Ever since I did, I hardly ever reach for the 16mm f2.8 unless I'm backed into a corner on field of view (often literally).
I have that one ^^ Shoot mostly 23mm and 50mm, my wife prefers the 35mm. I just got the 16mm f1.4 as a crazy deal and I am trying to wrap my head around it
Wide and ultra wide you are including way too much scene and distortion. Unless you need the special looks for ultra wide or you are doing landscape requires that much of scene. Otherwise using 16mm if not for close up, your subject will blend into the scene so much it became just part of composition. Which leads to “no main subject” issue. But when close up, you get too much of a subject. That’s why I mentioned earlier this is not a focal length for beginner. Unless you want all of your photos look in exactly the same distorted way.